[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: Track i915_active using debugobjects

[Matthew Auld]

On 21/06/2019 14:05, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Provide runtime asserts and tracking of i915_active via debugobjects.
> For example, this should allow us to check that the i915_active is only
> active when we expect it to be and is never freed too early.
> 
> One consequence is that, for simplicity, we no longer allow i915_active
> to be on-stack which only affected the selftests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_active.c           | 66 ++++++++++++++++-
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/i915_active.c | 78 +++++++++++++++-----
>   2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 

[snip]

> +
> +static struct live_active *
> +__live_active_setup(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
>   {
>   	struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
>   	struct i915_sw_fence *submit;
> +	struct live_active *active;
>   	enum intel_engine_id id;
>   	unsigned int count = 0;
>   	int err = 0;
>   
> -	submit = heap_fence_create(GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!submit)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> +	active = __live_alloc(i915);
> +	if (!active)
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>   
> -	i915_active_init(i915, &active->base, __live_active_retire);
> -	active->retired = false;
> +	submit = heap_fence_create(GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!submit) {
> +		kfree(active);
> +		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> +	}
>   
>   	if (!i915_active_acquire(&active->base)) {
>   		pr_err("First i915_active_acquire should report being idle\n");
> @@ -84,64 +107,79 @@ static int __live_active_setup(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
>   	i915_sw_fence_commit(submit);
>   	heap_fence_put(submit);
>   
> -	return err;
> +	/* XXX leaks live_active on error */
> +	return err ? ERR_PTR(err) : active

Too much of a pain?

Not a blocker,
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>